Posted by: Cynic
on 21, May, 2012
Tagged in:
working conditions ,
teaching ,
teachers ,
staffing ,
public education ,
professional learning and development ,
Hekia Parata ,
funding mechanisms ,
education spending ,
education politics ,
Class size
Just been reading about Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam - I suspect he and Hekia Parata might end up having some frustrations in common.
But one of his biggest frustrations has been realizing that running government isn’t always just like running a business.
...
Early this year, Haslam unveiled a plan to give school districts the flexibility to adjust class sizes, which would free up money to increase pay for teachers in tough-to-teach subjects or difficult-to-staff positions.
But the plan went down in flames.
Democrats and the state’s largest teachers’ union relentlessly attacked the plan, polls showed almost nine in 10 surveyed thought class sizes should be kept the same or made smaller, and even Republicans couldn’t bring themselves to support the governor’s proposal.
At the local level, school officials were worried that any money saved from raising the average class size would give elected school boards and county commissions reason to reduce education budgets instead of plugging the money into better teacher pay.
Missouri News Horizon
|
In New Zealand Hekia Parata has announced changes the staffing ratio - and says it's OK folks - schools can still keep class sizes the same, it's just a funding ratio. The "freed up" money is going to improve teaching quality.
Well let us unpack that just a teeny bit:
Posted by: PPTAweb
on 18, May, 2012
Tagged in:
Tomorrow's Schools ,
school choice ,
public education ,
privatisation ,
John Banks ,
education spending ,
education politics ,
charters ,
charter schools ,
Charter school working group ,
Catherine Isaac ,
ACT Party ,
ACT
The New Zealand Charter School Working Group tell us they are looking for a New Zealand model of charter schooling.
They tell us they need to do this because what charter schooling 'is' differs around the world.
The 'charter school' model does differ in the US, the UK, and Sweden, BUT in one fundamental aspect charter schools are the same - they privatise public education and privatise public tax dollars.
Posted by: Observer
on 06, Dec, 2011
Tagged in:
teaching ,
teachers ,
students with high needs ,
students ,
school choice ,
public education ,
National Party Education Policy ,
John Banks ,
education politics ,
Christchurch schools ,
charters ,
charter schools ,
ACT
What are we to make of the two multi-millionaire politicians - the two Johns - signing an agreement whereby the state abandons any responsibility for education in poor communities and instead hands it over to various churches, charities, American multinational franchises and any fly-by-night concern that sniffs a buck to be made. Apparently, the two Johns think poor communities are disadvantaged by having to learn what everyone else learns, do the same qualifications and have trained and qualified teachers so they are giving poor kids that chance to miss out on all the the things that wee Keys and the little Bankses take as their birthright.
Amazingly, lowering standards like this is apparently going to lift achievement even though that's not what has happened in the US which invented charter schools. The studies don't show any educational benefits for the model, once you control for the tendency to manipulate the school's roll to keep out the more challenging kids.
Posted by: PPTAweb
on 23, Nov, 2011
Tagged in:
Tomorrow's Schools ,
teaching ,
teachers ,
students ,
student achievement ,
secondary schools ,
public education ,
professional learning and development ,
National Party Education Policy ,
Mrs Tolley ,
league tables ,
elections ,
education politics ,
Christchurch schools ,
Anne Tolley
Dear Anne
I have just read your party education policy. This letter is written in disappointment that National Party education policy can so blithely ignore the best evidence in education research and policy, and dismay that you appear not to have heard the education hopes, dreams and aspirations that teachers have for their students.
National takes credit for all improvements in the education sector over the past three years; some achievements - such as retention rates in school, are unlikely to have been influenced by National education policy, others are simply manipulations such as 'employed 1600 more teachers"; shuffling funding from one education area to another doesn't double it; league tables encourage some particularly unpleasant uncooperative competitive behaviours so how on earth can your policy blithely state "ensure schools make the most of their facilities and resources and they collaborate rather than compete with each other" or does this only apply to Canterbury?
We'd like you to know that all actual improvements in the secondary education sector can be attributed to school communities, the hard work of parents, boards, students, teachers and, most importantly, quality teaching.
Posted by: PPTAweb
on 31, Oct, 2011
Tagged in:
unions ,
teaching ,
teachers ,
students ,
student achievement ,
secondary schools ,
schools ,
public education ,
professional ,
profession ,
PPTA ,
parliament ,
education politics
I described PPTA as being 'apolitical' recently and then immediately thought "oops don't think I used the right word", Kevin Bunker (PPTA General Secretary) always carefully describes PPTA "as not supporting any particular political party". So to Wikipedia I turned
"The state or quality of being apolitical can be the apathy and/or the antipathy towards all political affiliations. Being apolitical can also refer to situations in which people take an unbiased position in regard to political matters."
Wiktionary took it further
